PAWAN KUMAR,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, FATEHABAD

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

SMT. SHANKRI DEVI,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, PANCKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

section 57.\nThe said provision reads thus:\n\"57. Deductions.-The income chargeable under the head 'Income from other\nsources' shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely :.\n(iv) in the case of income of the nature referred to in clause (viii) of sub-\nsection (2) of section 56, a deduction of a sum equal to fifty

NARENDER KAUR,KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , KURUKSHETRA

237, Vill: Kaimbwala\nChandigarh-160103\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQJPS2941C\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by :\nShri Vineet Krishan, Advocate\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nBalvinder Singh\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 153 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14\nBasti Bhima Dhina, Fatehabd

SH. AJIT SINGH,PINJORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANCHKULA

237, Vill: Kaimbwala\nChandigarh-160103\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQJPS2941C\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nNone\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by :\nShri Vineet Krishan, Advocate\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nBalvinder Singh\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 153 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14\nBasti

SH. GURINDER SINGH GREWAL L/H OF PARNEET KAUR GREWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4(1), CHANDIGARH

Capital gains\"\n48. Against the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit\nSingh

BALJIT SINGH,AMBALA CITY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMBALA, AMBALA

237, Vill: Kaimbwala\nChandigarh-160103\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQJPS2941C\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nNone\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by :\nShri Vineet Krishan, Advocate\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nBalvinder Singh\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 153 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14\nBasti

BALVINDER SINGH,FATEHABAD vs. ITO WARD-1, FATEHABAD

237, Vill: Kaimbwala\nChandigarh-160103\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQJPS2941C\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nShri Vineet Krishan, Advocate\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by :\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 153 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14\nBalvinder Singh\nBasti Bhima Dhina, Fatehabd

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. AVTAR SINGH, VILLAGE- KAIMBWALA

Capital gains\"\n41\n48.\nAgainst the abovesaid decision the SLP filed by the assessee was\ndismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court was reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC)/[2021] 279\nTaxman 74 (SC)/[2..\n49. Similarly the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Inderjit

SH. AMRIK SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-2, PANCHKULA

237, Vill: Kaimbwala\nChandigarh-160103\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQJPS2941C\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nNone\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by :\nShri Vineet Krishan, Advocate\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nBalvinder Singh\nBasti Bhima Dhina, Fatehabd-\n125050, Haryana\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 153 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14\nबनाम\nThe

SARVAN SINGH,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 4, AMBALA

237, Vill: Kaimbwala\nChandigarh-160103\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQJPS2941C\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nNone\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by :\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nShri Vineet Krishan, Advocate\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 153 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14\nBalvinder Singh\nBasti